Headlines

AP

Washington weighs first-in-nation abortion insurance mandate

With 21 states having adopted bans or severe restrictions on insurance companies from paying for abortions, Washington is alone in seriously considering legislation mandating the opposite.
The Reproductive Parity Act, as supporters call it, would require insurers in Washington state who cover maternity care — which all insurers must do — to also pay for abortions.
The bill passed the state House earlier this month by a vote of 53-43, though it faces an uncertain future in the Senate. A similar bill in the New York state Assembly has been introduced each session for over a decade but has never received a public hearing.
“This is a core value for Washingtonians,” said Melanie Smith, a lobbyist for NARAL Pro-Choice Washington. “We should protect it while we still have it and not leave access to basic health care up to an insurance company.”

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

I, too, support the right of Democrats to murder their offspring. I encourage it, in fact.

lorien1973 on March 24, 2013 at 10:57 AM

They don’t care. The Malthusian Marxists are planning to recruit over your kids in their dead kids’ place. Send your kids to public school? Do they follow the Hollywood/music culture? They’re half way home.

Why should single guys, older people and those on birth control be forced to carry maternity coverage? Or abortion coverage?

lorien1973 on March 24, 2013 at 11:08 AM

The same reason they’re forced to subsidize everyone from some “worship me I have TEH KYDZ” conservatives to the Obamaphone crowd at the local Wal-Mart with at least two illegitimate brats apiece. Because apparently subsidizing reproduction is just such a genius idea - and it sure has got us more kids, the Catholic “waaah nobody’s expecting” rag of a book.

It’s triply insulting if you want a family so bad you literally feel like crying when you see so much as a billboard advertising wedding services.

Once more for your benefit: Why should single guys, older people and those on birth control be made to pay for (via taxes) everyone else’s kids, be they “quiverfull” conservatives to welfare-mooching liberals? It’s gotten us nothing but an entitlement mentality and broken families.

“This is a core value for Washingtonians,” said Melanie Smith, a lobbyist for NARAL Pro-Choice Washington. “We should protect it while we still have it and not leave access to basic health care up to an insurance company.”

Abortion = “basic health care”? Seriously?

Abortion is not about “health care” at all. It’s an elective procedure that’s all about convenience, not health.

And just because a health insurance company is not paying the bill, that doesn’t mean a woman can’t have an abortion; it just means she’ll have to use her own money (or her “baby daddy’s” money) to pay for it. But of course, that’s also an inconvenience as it cuts into her budget for tattoos and cigarettes, which is why these NARAL low-lifes are trying to turn abortion-on-demand (at someone else’s expense) into a natural right.

And, then, we can all wonder with mysticism – “Hey, why are insurance costs so high?”

lorien1973 on March 24, 2013 at 11:08 AM

If anything, you’re understating it. Plenty of women who are married and in their childbearing years will have their tubes tied after they’ve had all the children they want. Under legislation like this, they would also spend the rest of their lives paying into a pool to pay for other people’s abortions.

When we talk about making insurance mandatory for something that can never happen to the insured, we are basically requiring people to pay into a pool to provide services for others. People should not be required to pay for morally objectionable things, even indirectly.

Maybe that’s why, even in Washington, this bill usually goes down in defeat.